"Langton's "Signal Close Action" fast-play question" Topic

The wording on the Game Turn is a bit confusing. It sounds like it is IGO-UGO, but it also sounds like it may alternate by phase.

"The game is divided into Turns in which both players carry out a sequence of events alternately."
This sounds like players alternate acting by phase.

Next page above the list of Turn Sequence phases it says:
"The following is the game sequence for each player in his part of the Turn."
Which sounds like IGO-UGO by player Turn, not by the phases of the Game Turn.

Can anyone clarify?

It's IGO-UGO. Appendix 5 is an example of play which makes it pretty clear (Turn one – British player, Turn one – Enemy player, etc).

The example is supposed to be "unrealistically eventful", and I'd like to differ with that statement……

Well, reading about the Battle of San Domingo is a lot like reading about a viking melee, so I tend to agree with you there!

The thing I don't get is that if it is IGO-UGO aren't ships always going to be able to move around and rake the other since they are stationary? Or does the limited turn ability take care of that?

I haven't played them yet, obviously…

Sorry, I haven't been able to get to the computer for a few days. I hope you read this.

Yes, the limited turn ability does take care of that, also the ability dice roll. Basically you are doing a dance. Don't set yourself up into a position to be raked.

But then every IGO-UGO system has to deal with it. Even simultaneous sets have to deal with it. Someone has to move first otherwise nobody would leave their ship in a position to be raked. You'd end up with some sort of "Schrödinger's third rate", where the ship is simultaneously being raked and not being raked depending on what your opponent does.

After you play it a couple of times the light bulb will go off. Langton has a "full sized" set which I contend is so complicated you need to know how to sail a square-rigger to play it correctly. It has rules for setting springs. I had to look that up.

I find the Quick-play set to be as complicated as I can handle.

Cheers,
JohnG.

Yeah, I hear you JohnG – and I grew up sailing and raced 10mm J-boats into my 20s!

I don't think that written orders allow for that to happen, and if the movement is short enough [ergo the turn has to be short enough] you only get rakes that you genuinely outthought your opponent on the previous turn.

Totally agree re IGO-UGO AoS rule sets. Those that I have seen played at conventions invariably devolve into "I rake you; you rake me" exercises.

Secondly (IMHO) no AoS game can successfully reproduce real-world combat tactics unless the movement mechanics both permit and restrict the models on the table to the real-world maneuvers and evolutions available to them. If the movement rules fail to represent evolutions like backing sail, heaving to, luffing, falling off, etc, they are effectively editing out about two-thirds of a ship's close-quarters tactical flexibility

Another beef is the "nose-to-tail" line of battle configurations. There was an important reason why ships kept a cable or two interval when sailing in line of battle. Many rules completely ignore such issues.

On the subject of tacking – Some rules I see appear to equate the maneuverability of a line-of-battle ship with that of a sailboat. In light to moderate breezes with smooth seas, a frigate or small two-decker would require at least six minutes to execute a tack; Boudriot has cited as long as 15 minutes to tack a big three-decker. Things moved a LOT slower back then.

Stalkey is on target when he references the utility of turns of short time duration, which in turn goes far to remove the need for written orders. I've run countless convention games since 2005, where my AoS rules work on that very basis – one minute turns, simultaneous movement, no pre-written movement orders unless specifically requested by a nearby player. To be fair, it works (IMO) because the rules also feature ground scale = ship scale (3 inches = 100 yards in 1:1200 scale, for example).

B

If IGO_UGO bothers you try using the impulse movement charts from starfleet battles.It will lead to more free flowing games but will take extra playing time as players simultaneously go through every potential movement opportunity.

Hi Warpspeed,
Thank you for your post, which absolutely deserves a considered response.

In designing my AoS rules, the goal was to enable 3-4 players to fight a small engagement (like Lissa 1811 – 10 frigates total) to a conclusion in an evening and a large line of battle engagement (Grenada, Sadras, Glorious 1st of June) playable to conclusion on a Saturday by 6 or so players.

The unrealistic artificiality of IGO-UGO movement troubled me to such a degree that I discarded it as unviable right from the start.

I never seriously considered impulse movement (which can often mean considerably different things to different people) because I wanted the game mechanics kept as fast and simple as possible and as free of charts as possible.

My solution was simultaneous movement coupled with game turns of short historical time duration coupled with a ground scale consistent with the scale of ship models in use coupled with realistic movement distances versus time.

I could fill a couple of pages with complicated explanations as to how all the various components of the rules fit together to deliver a workable fast-playing game. But the best way to grasp it would be to play a game.

FWIW.

B